On 11/13 07:55 , Monte Milanuk wrote:
>The problem is... the drive capacities are huge relative to the
>network speeds I'm getting.
Not to trivialize the matter but:
- wireless isn't as good as wired, if you have a choice
- what matters isn't the drive size but rather the amount of data
i might be lying, BUT... i think that rsync is better at continuing
interrupted transfers??
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 7:55 PM, Monte Milanuk wrote:
> So... got an old PC online and running as a Linux file server, running ssh
> and samba. Main OS is on a 13.8GB PATA drive, with a 12.2GB / partition
So... got an old PC online and running as a Linux file
server, running ssh and samba. Main OS is on a 13.8GB PATA drive, with
a 12.2GB / partition, and a 1.5GB partition for swap. There are two
500GB SATA drives set up in a software RAID 1 configuration mounted
under /srv. I have BackupPC ru
